cybervegan

Totally lost me at the "Amazon ... is a net good".

And maybe because I choose "unusual" domain names, I've found buying them to be relatively straight-forward. There are now so many top-level domains to choose from that you can usually concoct something that works well with one of them. Admittedly, these haven't been names for "startups" - they're for small businesses and local groups, but it can't be that different.

We aren't even responsible enough with the nuclear assets and waste we already have, and we're going to have to actively look after that lot for millennia to come. You can't just walk away from a spent fuel waste facility - you have to run it, or it will eventually leak radioactive isotopes into the environment. We aren't even doing that right now, so how do we expect our decendents to have the will and knowledge to do that in 2200? If we're still around at all.

So Bitcoin is just distilled capitalism, right?

Surely if you aren't sequestering the CO2 somewhere, but instead releasing back again later, you are having a net negative effect, as your equipment has running costs (paid for with fossil fuels).

It's totally over my head. The final screen needs a button for "don't get it" or "annoyed at the pretentiousness".

That's really weird - I've just put on a pot of dried chick peas to boil, so I'm literally making aquafaba right now. Things that make you go "hmmm"...

Why does the title say "Snood Bloober" but the linked article say "Snark Barker"? Just curious - did it change or something?

Not going to use linkedin, sorry. Would have had a look otherwise. Not everybody is on there, or wants to be.

I know what you mean.

I've been working on something similar, with the intention of making something that separates semantic tags from formatting tags, such that the resulting document could be directly narrated or dictated, without resorting to too many (if any) "special" words for punctuation. Renderers could easily translate/format the output for better style or into a form more appropriate for their purposes; "editors" could do the same.

Currently, screen-readers do not cope well with modern web pages, and can you imagine trying to dictate HTML to a speech-to-text based editor? Using our approach means you can literally speak the content to the stt, and have it appear on-screen in a displayable format. I'm thinking this would be useful for verbal/conversation applications where you can effectively dispense with a visual display.

I haven't put my ideas into any kind of proper documentation, but they are very close to yours.

The author seems to not know the difference between the chip and the ISA - Instruction Set Architecture. How this is implemented in silicon (or other substrate) does not seem to have been released, so you'd have to create your own cores, cache, memory interface and all that jazz. It does mean that RISC-V chips could be used as a starting point, because they already implement all that, but with a different ISA. However, it's probably non-trivial to implement a different ISA on an existing chip design. AMD did it with their early Athlon chips, by using a translation layer, but that's not the most efficient way to do it...

It's not about the application of morally correct decryption of messages by a third-party, but about the immoral decryption (whatever that is); an algorithm or system cannot tell the difference in the intent of the decryptor.

If there exists a technical method by which to decrypt arbitrary messages, it will be abused. Claiming you can keep this method secret whilst the world searches in earnest for that secret is unrealistic. Saying that only certain types of communication should be subject to vulnerable encryption infers that the encryption algorithm can tell the difference between those types of communication: is it OK to encrypt banking transactional communications with unbreakable encryption, but internet chat communications must be encrypted with breakable encryption? How can you tell the difference? How can you ensure that someone isn't sending communications that are evidence of criminal activities over the banking communications channels? The Algorithm doesn't know or care what kind of communication it is, and once encrypted, an outside observer can't tell anyway.

You could say "well, chat program providers are only allowed to use breakable encryption, but bankers are allowed to use the unbreakable kind". So, now you have created a protected class of people, who are allowed privacy, and another who are not. Bankers commit crimes too, but the evidence of their crimes won't be available to be decrypted. So maybe you could make it illegal for people to communicate plans of criminal activity over unbreakable encryption, but that won't stop criminals from doing it. You could ban encryption entirely, but then whole, legitimate industries, such as online banking; international banking; stock exchanges; online commerce; "cloud computing"; and managed service providers would be untenable, and wither and die.

If humanity has a purpose, it seems to be to destroy the planet.

People are pessimistic precisely because they are aware that if we don't do something about the climate crisis, everything will come crashing down. Being optimistic about it, you might say "don't worry, they'll work out a plan" (whoever they are), and then carry on as before, but being pessimistic, you're more likely to think "we'd better do something, and NOW!".

When you realise that Live Aid was one of the earliest reactions to the climate disaster, and that it was OVER 30 YEARS AGO and no real progress has been made: CO2 emissions have continued to rise exponentially, almost unabated.

When you realise that, you realise there is no cause for optimism.

Who's paying Cox? I can almost taste the tinge of corporate interest.

And it should all be left exactly where it is. Fossil fuels are killing our people and our environment.

So... what's this for? I mean, I know what progress bars are for per se but I can't see any mention of a way to tie the meter to something concrete other than time - and we already have clocks and calendars for that. I must be missing something...

The neural network of nematode worms has been modelled in software, and a robotic avatar has been built for this "mind". It behaves very much like a real nematode worm.

Real nematode worms appear to be conscious to an extent, in so far as they forage for food and mates, and retreat from danger or threats. I don't think we would argue that nematodes have the same level of consciousness as we do. If the mechanical model also does this, it it conscious too?

We also know that different animals display different levels of consciousness, in many ways reflected by the amount of brain mass they posess; animals with far simpler brains appear, by and large, to be less conscious than animals with larger, more complex brains. We also know that damage to brains alters the properties of consciousness, as do interference with brain chemistry or electrical activity. It seems more likely that consciousness is an emergent property of the interactions between the physical structure of the brain/nervous system and electrical/chemical messaging.

I think that assuming matter has a special, magical property of "consciousness" is just re-hashing the unfalsifiable concept of a "soul".

From a builder's perspective, all rules are advisory. You may want the specific effect these rules state is a problem - what if you want something to detach with less force than the "click"?

But these rules are really for Lego's internal use - I can understand the company wanting to make sure that kits it sells work properly in isolation, but obviously they can't control the other kits it will be mixed with. Maybe this means that they should have considered more possible combinations when designing those particular parts?

50 y/o Aspie here, late diagnosis (about 6 years ago).

This is exactly why my wife is home-schooling our kids. My 14 y/o step-daughter (diagnosed with ASD) and our younger 6 and 7 y/o boys, who show some signs. The eldest is going through the process of diagnosis.

Step-daughter had serious anxiety problems with school, and was falling too far behind. Schools here in the UK are supposed to make provisions for kids with special needs, but don't have the funding or support to do it. The younger boys were also getting left behind in the classroom... Home ed was the only way to get them back on track. Challenging, but it seems to be working - my wife does most of it. She trained as a teacher, so knows how to assess progress and plan curriculum etc.

But Free Software is a reaction against Proprietary Software... it exists because some people don't want to embrace PS.

Hey ho. You go your way and I'll go mine.

Amavisd. About 11,000 lines of crufty perl.

Wait til Bloomberger get hold of this!

After about 5 or 6 years of abusing an electric guitar, learning from tab, you tube tutorials, general messing round etc. what it feels like to me is that now can guess from a note I hear, roughly where that will appear on the fretboard, and how it was struck - picked, finger, palm muting, and so on. I can listen to a riff and if I can get the first note or chord, I can work from there as I know a bit about what "next" note or chord will or won't work. You start out with a very generalised idea of where the high and low notes are, but it takes time before you internalise that, and then later you begin to be able to relate the sound of another musician playing to how you might play the same. I'm still crap, though.

There were sooo many crap webpages created with that software. I used it myself for a while, before I knew better. It produced horrendous, buggy HTML. Table handling was pants - I used to have to hand code tables (used for layout!) to make them work properly. At least we don't have to do that these days... oh, wait, sorry. Ok, we do.

I don't think this is going to work out the way redis wants it to. Most likely, this will cause a fork of whatever "modules" they have applied the new "Commons Clause" to and everyone will continue on pretty much as before. It will also most likely alienate existing community members and dissuade people from contributing back - they may even lose important contributors over this.

Scary! Scary! Don't go in there - it's SCARY!

But scary for whom? For ARM maybe? Is it just me, or is this pure FUD?

The "Play notes with a 5.00 Hz difference" section seems like a massive leap from the section before, without the same level of explanation that preceded it. I can't perceive/work out what they are talking about - I'm not sure what I'm listening for. Could be because of my freaky Asperger's brain wiring tho.

I learning to play electric guitar, and have wanted to learn to tune by ear for ages. It's frustrating that I was able to follow along with ease up to this point, but now feel I've been pushed in at the deep end. It's just so close but not quite there.

Thanks for summarising, because I can't see the actual article, because I applied the fb blackhole list to my /etc/hosts, for exactly this reason.

The holes in this article belie an fundamental misunderstanding of how the flaw works, and, how computers in general work. I agree with the general premise of the article, but if they don't understand it, they should avoid trying to explain it.